Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Confirms Xbox One's Phone Home Requirement, Game Resale Rules
Following the confusion surrounding Microsoft's announcement of the Xbox One, the company has now clarified many of the hot-button issues in a set of posts on their official site. First, they confirmed that the console will need to phone home in order to continue playing games. On your primary console, you'd need to connect to the internet and check in once every 24 hours. They also announced that you'll be able to access and play any of your games by logging in on somebody else's console, but the internet connection will be required every hour to keep playing that way. Other media don't require the connection. Microsoft also explained how game licensing will work. On the upside, anyone using your console will be able to play your games, and you can share your games with up to 10 members of your family for free. The downside is the news about used games; Microsoft says they've "designed Xbox One so game publishers can enable you to trade in your games at participating retailers." The key word there is can, which implies that you can't without the publisher's express permission. Finally, the company made a set of statements about how Kinect's audio and video sensors will collect and share your data. "When Xbox One is on and you're simply having a conversation in your living room, your conversation is not being recorded or uploaded." They also say data gathered during normal use won't leave the console without your explicit permission.
Seriously, the need to phone home once/day is a deal breaker. Not being able to take a game over to a friends place without signing into my account is a deal breaker. Telling me how I can sell or giveaway my used games is a deal breaker.
There's nothing about this that I'm interested in. I don't play games online, my XBox isn't connected to a network because they started putting ads into the games, and I refuse to give them a channel for it.
So, my single purchase (or non-purchase) is insignificant, and Microsoft won't care. But of the people I know who own an XBox, pretty much all of them have said they don't want this either.
There's nothing about this new platform that sounds good for the consumer, and it certainly doesn't leave them much choice.
So whatever the first next-generation console is which can be ran entirely offline without any network connection over its lifetime stands a pretty good chance of getting bought. But Microsoft can eat shit if they think I'll pay them for the privilege of owning one of these (which I'm sure the EULA says we don't own anyway).
Either I and people like myself will pretty much be irrelevant, which is fine, or there's going to be a huge consumer backlash against this, and Microsoft is going to find themselves holding the bag on a gaming platform nobody wants.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I think Nintendo will just become king of the hill again in that case. They can promote the WiiU being the only console that has this and stores will push it hard.
What if I get banned from Xbox Live? Does this 24-hour check-in fail? Am I no longer allowed to play my single player games?
Steam DRM is ridiculously EASY to crack given that with their authentication setup they could make it nearly bulletproof if they chose(and they are well aware of this but have done nothing much to fix it as it's a feature and not a bug) and more importantly, they have PLENTY of competition on their platform which forces them to price their fare accordingly.
I guess it depends on whether you owned the game in the first place. for instance, Adobe's licensing makes it clear that you don't own the software that you bought, you just own a license to use it. If game developers use similar license agreements then the law you mention probably does not apply.
I can currently give or sell a game to anyone with no requirements that the recipient is on a friends list. They use wording to give the appearance that they are enabling things, but it is really a matter of stating what they are allowing you to do and what you cannot do.
Buying and selling used games is a huge market and creates liquidity for people to buy new games. This is no different than how buying and selling stocks on the stock market creates liquidity for IPOs. But now they are killing that liquidity for game customers.
On your last point, I would argue that sharing a game among users is an irrelevant feature. In my experience, if a game is worth playing, it is worth owning. I do not want to depend upon the generosity of my friends (and vice verse) to be able to play a game. Everyone loses control in that scenario.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!